The RSPCA has been accused of wasting £13,500 of taxpayers' cash and donations after it pursued a family through the courts only for a hunt case to collapse straight away.

Farmer Keith Watson used a terrier to legally flush out a fox last year, before he and his family were then accused of disturbing a badger sett by the charity.

A police raid on their farm followed, with equipment seized, while Mr Watson, his partner Tanya Norlander, and his teenage daughter Hannah Watson were separated and taken for hour-long interviews at a local police station.

Victory: Keith Watson, his daughter Hannah, and partner Tanya at their farm on the day the RSPCA case against them was thrown out

For a year the family has lived under 'extreme stress' and Hannah now 19, was left 'unable to sleep' or study for her A-levels.

RELATED ARTICLES

Share this article

But yesterday the case against them collapsed on the first morning at Crewe Magistrates' Court after the RSPCA admitted they did not have enough evidence against them to continue.

It is estimated the charity spent £3,500 of donations funding the botched case and the taxpayer will have to pick up the estimated legal bill of £10,000 for the family's defence lawyers.

Upset: The family were split up and interviewed by police after a fox was legally flushed out on the farm, which led to the RSPCA claiming they disturbed a badger sett

Mr Watson claims animal activists had 'hidden behind bushes' to secretly film the activity at a fox's earth - the evidence the later used to try and prosecute him.

He maintains the area was not being used by badgers and that his family was targeted for doing nothing wrong in an effort to stop the hunt.

'It is a nightmare when you know you are not guilty and you have done nothing wrong but you are being picked on to make an example of,' he said.

'The RSPCA are not interested in animal welfare, they are just going after the hunting community. They do not have to pay the bills, it is the taxpayer.'

Case: The hearing at Cheshire Magistrates Courts yesterday collapsed when the RSPCA admitted they did not have enough evidence

Hannah, who was eighteen at the time of the raid on her family's Cheshire farm in March last year called the behaviour 'intimidating.'

She said: 'I feel my family was targeted. It was intimidating and very scary.'

Their solicitor Stephen Welford called the move to prosecute the family, who regularly help with the Cheshire Hunt to hunt legally with dogs, 'an ill-informed decision.'

Tim Bonner, Director of Campaigns at the Countryside Alliance, accused the animal charity of pursuing a 'vindictive campaign' against legal hunts based on 'weak and flawed' evidence.

'It is simply disgraceful that the RSPCA is using the criminal justice system to pursue a vindictive campaign against the hunting community,' he said.

'There is no way on earth that the police and Crown Prosecution Service would have prosecuted on such flawed and weak evidence, but the RSPCA pursued Mr Watson and his family simply because they were part of the Cheshire Hunt.'

View: The family's solicitor said they were only targeted because they were part of the famous Cheshire Hunt (pictured)

He added the RSPCA also have two other ongoing cases connected to hunts in the North West and Wiltshire, one of which also involves interfering with a badger sett.

The news comes as the Charities Commission questioned the RSPCA's use of its own funds to bring prosecutions after a judge criticised the charity for spending £326,000 prosecuting David Cameron's local hunt the Heythrop.

The charity pointed out that the case against Mr Watson was reviewed against the Code for Crown Prosecutors and at all stages leading up to the trial, it had been considered appropriate to prosecute.

'The RSPCA believes that if it is presented with evidence of alleged offences concerning animal cruelty they should be properly investigated and prosecuted where appropriate,' a spokesman said.

'It is extremely rare that RSPCA cases conclude like this. We prosecute roughly 1 per cent of the incidents we are asked to investigate and have a success rate of around 98 per cent.'